digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

See the original image at gizmodo.com

Policeman Tases Guy, Sets His Pants on Fire

gizmodo.com — Ok, we know bad things can happen when the general public use tasers, but cops tasing a guy and setting him on fire? No... really?

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • c0balt279, on 04/24/2008, -5/+23Bad things happen when the general public uses a tasers. Horrible things happen when cops use tasers!
    • funkymoose, on 04/24/2008, -7/+3Sorry but I rather have a police officer use a taser then have to use a gun or baton.
  • OBDriftwood, on 04/24/2008, -3/+47Why so quick to blame the taser? Maybe the perp was a liar liar.
    • Morghin, on 04/24/2008, -9/+2The first thing I thought when I read the "pants on fire" was "liar liar pants on fire". When I read your comment I just cracked up, was thinking about writing the exact same thing
      • flashback99, on 04/24/2008, -1/+8but instead you wrote this dire explanation of your thought process.
  • Neticule, on 04/24/2008, -1/+17I read a story on digg maybe about a year ago or so where a guy covered himself in gasoline, the police thought the best thing to do was taser him. :o/
    • flashback99, on 04/24/2008, -0/+6Sounds like something from Reno 911!
  • AzureRise, on 04/24/2008, -0/+4Where's that guy that patented taser proof clothing when you need him?
  • MrTito, on 04/24/2008, -1/+5MC Hammer got tased?
  • Oppslagsverk, on 04/24/2008, -5/+2Aren't there a song about pants on fire? Or maybe it was "liar liar pants on fire"... I want a song about pants on fire!
  • eyepatch100, on 04/24/2008, -5/+3He should have just told the truth.
  • idavidtang, on 04/24/2008, -8/+1liar liar pants on fire..
  • evildaz, on 04/24/2008, -0/+7Goodness Gracious! ....... Great balls of fire?
  • fxu1989, on 04/24/2008, -2/+11I read the title as:

    "Policeman tases guy and sets his pants on fire" ...
    • AzureRise, on 04/24/2008, -0/+1Don't be surprised if you see that headline anytime soon.
    • DemDude, on 04/24/2008, -0/+4standard protocol. I don't see what's odd about this ^^
  • kbir007, on 04/24/2008, -3/+8Don't set me on fire bro!
  • WesleyD, on 04/24/2008, -2/+8Link to the actual article: http://www.thespec.com/News/Local/article/356763

    "Don't flame me, bro!"
  • Jovensdesciple, on 04/24/2008, -11/+2***** that tased guy and ***** his pants... Don't mess with cops *****. Even pothead should like cops.
    • JCPahl, on 04/24/2008, -0/+1So, in your view, authority cannot be abused, or should we think well even of police who do abuse their authority?
      • flashback99, on 04/24/2008, -1/+1IQ of response >> IQ of original comment.
    • funkymoose, on 04/24/2008, -1/+3This guy just likes making dumb comments. I think he averages at about -10 diggs each comment to. Think about it, his comment doesn't even make sense.
      • cdahlkvist, on 04/24/2008, -2/+2Which means he must be a cop...or is a good candidate to be one.
    • csw1342, on 04/24/2008, -1/+1Piss poor troll logic! Pathetic.
  • FarmPunk, on 04/24/2008, -3/+13Why are tasers legal? Obviously, electrocuting people with some supposedly magical voltage that's between debilitating and lethal is going to kill some people, to start with... and giving the police the mindset that they can use tasers without major worry is an invitation to abuse.
    • funkymoose, on 04/24/2008, -4/+6hm the alternative in many cases is a baton or gun, and many times cops will yank out a baton or gun before they engage in a fistfight or think their life may be in danger. Awhile ago in Berkeley, police had to shoot (they were legally justified) a guy. The police said that it would've been avoided if they had a taser. Also for the most part after you get taser'd you don't suffer any real damage, you can pretty much walk off a taser shot pretty quickly. A baton on the other hand, you can very well have broken bones, etc. If they banned tasers that means more baton and gun use. I kinda hate how many people don't realize that and are just jumping on the "cops shouldn't have tasers" bandwagon due to the excessive amount of taser/police stories on digg.
      • Elohir, on 04/24/2008, -5/+4Have you not considered that there are an excessive amount of taser/police stories on digg because of the excessive amount of abuse of tasers? It seems a week doesn't go by without another "Cop tazes crippled man", "Cop tazes man in own home", "Cop tazes subdued man", "Cop tazes 90yr old woman", "Cop tazes man 10 times, man dies of heart attack". Digg isn't 'anti-taser', reality is.
        • Cl1mh4224rd, on 04/24/2008, -3/+3> "Have you not considered that there are an excessive amount of taser/police stories on digg because of the excessive amount of abuse of tasers?"

          I have, and it's a ***** hypothesis. All of these taser stories only started after "Don't tase me, bro" boy got his. Also, all these stories comprise a statistically insignificant sample...
          • smotpoker, on 04/24/2008, -1/+3Most of these taser stories getting attention may be statistically insignificant but they compromise only a small number of such abuses. Like all police brutality/excessive force cases, only the most credible victims and cases with most convincing evidence ever get any real coverage - and even those are usually dismissed or settled out of court
      • smotpoker, on 04/24/2008, -2/+2In most cases, diplomacy/negotiation can be used. In even more, physical force or intimidation can be used without actual violence if the officer is willing to await backup.

        The problem isn't which weapons need to be used, it is the perception that weapons/violence are the only option for handling unruly, uncooperative or agitated suspects and that their cooperation mandates unconditional submission to whatever is demanded.
        • funkymoose, on 04/24/2008, -1/+2"In most cases, diplomacy/negotiation can be used. "
          - True and that's what happens in real life, we just don't hear about that happening because people don't put it in the news. News generally reports the usually, not the usual, for obvious reasons. But I also think you heavily underestimate how many people have a strong hatred for police and lack reason when police arrive.
          "In even more, physical force or intimidation can be used without actual violence if the officer is willing to await backup."
          - True and that's what happens a lot. But often police don't want to have to wait for backup and want to end the problem there. Most of the time if an offender is doing something that requires force to stop him, police want him to stop soon as possible before others are harmed or more things are destroyed.

          In some cases I would agree with you. But I think there is a misconception that all these things can be talked out. Often a lot of these people are willing to physically fight or harm police in either anger, or from trying to escape. I was reading an article in the paper the other day about the city of San Fransisco raising the prices of tickets because the city is low on funds. Cops don't like the idea because it will just lead to more angry citizens they have to deal with. One officer who was quoted in the paper said a firefighter got into a physical fight with him over a 50 dollar ticket. These things happen, and often happen on the spot.
          I also want to point out the article about the taser catching the guys pants on fire makes no mention of why they tased him. I would say you would be wrong to assume that the police tased him just for being uncooperative. The article does not even question if the police were right or wrong. It just states that the guys pants caught on fire. When cops use a taser it's generally because they feel the life of them or someone else might be in danger. Sometimes an unwillingness to cooperate or someone who's acting very aggressive heavily suggests that they might intent harm upon them. I've seen a few videos of police getting shot and killed and most of the time it's because they were too trustworthy or tried to fight the offender without having to use their gun.
          • smotpoker, on 04/24/2008, -1/+1"True and that's what happens in real life, we just don't hear about that happening because people don't put it in the news." - Domestic disputes and hostage situations aside, that is untrue as often as it is from what I've seen/read/experienced. Many people are more or less greeted with contempt and sarcasm and orders when they are initially approached by officers and any form of resistance is met with threats/attempts of violence or incarceration. In some cases this is more understandable than others and usually suspects comply pretty quickly but in many cases they resent the approach and resist to some degree.


            "But I think there is a misconception that all these things can be talked out" - There is very little misconception to that affect (at least here in America). Quite the opposite actually, any resistance whatsoever is often met with violent force (admittedly with a cursory warning if the resistance is not physical) and if the suspect complains they are always ridiculed as stupid/asking for it


            Since you mention SF I assume you are from there or another urban area where law enforcement have real crime to deal with and such problems aren't quite so pervasive, but in rural or impoverished areas with less [credible] witnesses or income for a good lawyer police do habitually overstep their bounds quite often. Only the most credible accounts with best evidence goto court and many of those are settled out of court. The reports we see on digg are the tip of the iceburg
        • mike17032, on 04/24/2008, -1/+2Watch cops sometime, then make that stupid statement again.

          If talking works, you dont end up needing to be tased.
    • vinnyvenus, on 04/24/2008, -1/+3Taser are suppose to replace gun
      • flashback99, on 04/24/2008, -2/+2For short ranges where you have a line of sight.
        • smotpoker, on 04/24/2008, -1/+2and when the suspect poses some sort of imminent physical threat
        • Cl1mh4224rd, on 04/24/2008, -0/+2> "For short ranges where you have a line of sight."

          I'm not sure why you added the "line of sight" part to your statement. Surely guns require line-of-sight, too...
          • itsgotyou, on 04/24/2008, -1/+1Israellis have invented guns that can shoot around corners.
    • mike17032, on 04/24/2008, -1/+2Because its better than shooting them or beating the hell out of them, thats why.

      Next stupid question?
  • vinnyvenus, on 04/24/2008, -0/+9Can a fart set the pants on fire if a person is getting tased? Serious question. Mythbuster needs to solve this mystery.
  • SwankRock3000, on 04/24/2008, -0/+4This thread could have been titled "Race to make a hysterical pun about someone being a "liar"".
  • omercyme33, on 04/24/2008, -7/+1"Don't taser me, bro!"
  • headband, on 04/24/2008, -5/+2sometimes people deserve to get tasered, its not likethe cop pulled out a lighter and some gasoline and tried to light him
  • NecroDigg, on 04/24/2008, -0/+1Um, was he carrying gasoline in his pocket or something? Wtf.
  • itsbob, on 04/24/2008, -1/+1Liar!
  • jazzboyrules, on 04/24/2008, -0/+1Dugg because the title alone cracked me up :)
  • Rosco, on 04/24/2008, -1/+1Great Balls of Fire!
  • diablo2032, on 04/24/2008, -0/+1"DONT BURN ME BRO" DONT BURN ME
  • CressCrowbits, on 04/24/2008, -0/+2Don't blaze me, bro!
  • IndigoMoss, on 04/24/2008, -0/+1If you love someone set them on fire.
  • mrzack, on 04/24/2008, -1/+2OMG, what has this country become? fascist.
  • Tenzy, on 04/24/2008, -0/+0Don't braize me bro!
  • sardiax, on 04/24/2008, -0/+2God, I first read that headline as 'Pokemon tases Guy, Sets His Pants on Fire."
    I need more sleep.
  • toastmonster, on 04/24/2008, -1/+2Tasers aren't funny
  • argus, on 04/24/2008, -0/+3Why do I have a feeling this is going to end up on Mythbusters?
  • mike17032, on 04/24/2008, -2/+1And here we have yet another lesson as to why its ***** retarded to resist arrest.

    At least in this case there is a chance the guy burned his nuts off so he cant breed.
  • wexmajor, on 04/24/2008, -1/+1So why in the flying ***** are we still allowing cops to carry lasers? Guns for dangerous situations, nightsticks for abusing power. Tasers don't factor into it.
    • mike17032, on 04/24/2008, -1/+1Wow, cops get ***** lasers now? Awsome!

      To answer your question, because they are far safer than night sticks. I dont care what little stories you find on digg.
  • gigitrix, on 04/24/2008, -0/+1don't spontaneously combust me bro!
    I'll get my coat.
  • thecoolestguy, on 04/24/2008, -1/+1That's what you get for wearing hemp pants, hippy.
  • Treoinmypocket, on 04/24/2008, -0/+1Mythbusters - seen it.
  • ThisIsTheEnd, on 04/24/2008, -0/+1What happened to the good old days when if somebody was mouthing off to a cop they'd just get cracked in the face with a nightstick. It would certainly save them battery costs.
    • DerangedPenguin, on 04/25/2008, -0/+0Ouch! Face meet my PR-24. Crack!
  • DerangedPenguin, on 04/25/2008, -1/+0OMG Bro you set my pants on fire! Still better than getting a .40 or .45 slug through the heart.
  • asherchang, on 04/25/2008, -0/+2Wow... I am utterly amazed at the recursive, almost cannibalistic nature of Digg and the major blogs of the internet which regularly get their posts on to the front page. Let me explain:

    The Hamilton Spectator originally writes an article on the story, and it gets submitted to Digg by specspec (connected to the newspaper itself?) 4 days ago (http://digg.com/odd_stuff/Taser_shock_triggers_fir ...

    Yesterday, Noah Shachtman Gizmodo's decides to search through Digg for taser stories (most likely with "taser", "all stories", "by date", as I do sporadically), as tasers are relevant to his blog on national security.

    As DANGERROOM is a part of the Wired blog network, Gizmodo writer Kit Eaton finds it and decides that as a weird and very Diggable (ZOMG, PANTS ON FIRE!) story that's bound to get him a bunch of page hits (and for him money), he comments on it and provides a link.

    Then, Digg star lekahe, who reads Gawker blogs as does about half of Digg users, submits this Gizmodo article and lets her Digg stardom (her 49 front-paged submissions and the political networking that made them possible) garner a flurry of blind fannish Diggs that float her story to to the front page.

    What am I trying to say? I don't know.
    • asherchang, on 04/25/2008, -0/+1oops, "Gizmodo's" In the third paragraph should've been deleted....
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.